Job loss tally started

Is our economy heading into a new series of job losses, or is that just part of the transitioning of our economy? We are collecting the evidence

14th Feb 13, 4:36pm by David Chaston

Today we reported that consumer confidence is at a 32 month high, and that banks have lowered interest rates again close to record low levels.

Clearly real estate markets are rising, and the price rises are spreading out from the main centers.

Even todays PMI (Performance of Manufacturing Index) came in at a level that was its highest since May 2012.

We also seem to be on the brink of reporting a record post-float high for the exchange rate TWI - at about 3pm today we almost nudged that high. (Update: Actually, we did overnight.)

We also received a press release from the Labour Party with the "shocking indictment" that "400 jobs go in four days, 200 in 28 hours".

The Opposition parties have been running a parliamentary jobs inquiry supported by one manufacturer and exporter trade association who clearly want to see a change of policy to support export manufacturers and the jobs in that industry.

Clearly there are two trends developing. The traditional sectors are finding it tough, the new parts of the economy seem to be driving the positive indicators.

Not everyone is convinced we have the problem others claim to see.

So we are restarting our job loss tally.

(We ran a similar tally in the heart of the GFC, starting in late 2008 through 2009. You can see that older list here » )

This new list of jobs lost is here »

So far for 2013 we have more than 700 jobs losses on the list that we are aware of.

We are asking readers to help us keep the list up-to-date. Please add the information you have either to the comments section of this story, or the comments section on the Tally, and we will include them.

However, what is interesting about this new short list is that only the Oamaru wool spinner jobs lost are from the tradeables sector - the rest are in the non-tradeables sector, an outcome that is a little surprising.

Time will tell, however. Lets come back to this list and see what the pattern is in a month or so.

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment

Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.

19 Comments

by Matt in Auck | 14th Feb 13, 9:32pm 1360830748

This is a useful resource.

Will be very interesting to see the rate in March - how many of the 100,000 + graduates are going to find work?

by raegun | 15th Feb 13, 7:43am 1360867418

Unless and until we wake up and realise that with more and more people unable to buy products and services the more and more cutbacks and efficiencies have to be make, therefore more and more people unable to buy and contribute

I know I sound like a Luddite, but surely by now, you can begin to see that the Luddites were actually right.

Mechanisation and "efficiencies" are the CAUSE of the problem, I am yet to see where the cause of a problem is also the solution.

As things are more and more mechanised who, tell me, is it that will buy the goods and services.

by powerdownkiwi | 15th Feb 13, 7:45am 1360867522

A deckchair discussion.

If you take 'job' as being 'a needed activity, regardless of fiscal reward', there is - and will continue to be - a growing demand. The displacing of fossil fuels can't possibly reult in any other scenario.

If you take 'job' as being 'fiscally rewarded', there will be a gradual reduction.

Shouldn't be any surprise there; money expects to buy bits of the planet, and there are more folk than ever, bidding for less supply than ever. The need for food, water and shelter, however, exists ex-money.

by raegun | 15th Feb 13, 8:29am 1360870162

Food shelter and water cost money as well, too much for many, therefore the job is required to be fiscally rewarded in order to provide, especialy where people live in heavily populated areas with little or no access to land to grow or hunt on.

The other solution then is far far fewer people, given that fewer and fewer are able to contribute to and benefit from the modern economy, we must therefore not need the others who aren't.

by steven | 15th Feb 13, 8:57am 1360871834

You are almost there....Except the present modern economy is utterly dependant on oil, which will be gone no later than 2050. Given the utter dependance on it and it being cheap, its likely our economy we see today will not be similar by 2030 and maybe 2020.

regards

by kin | 15th Feb 13, 8:38am 1360870718

What an interesting analysis,

So our "old" ( manufacturing and exports) economy is now declining and losing jobs,

while our new "rising" sector (properties) is growing and soon will be the new engine of growth.....

When have we heard all this before??

It all seems sooooooo 2006/7 all over again.

ALL western developed economies is going into decline (unless NZ is neither Western nor Developed) due to excessive debt and lack of productivity, the coddled financial sector is the only sector alive (or not dead yet ?) which is fueling the property sector.....need we analyse more ???

Until we solve this lack of productivity and excessive debt/goverment spending, we will never get out of this trap.

LATEST NEW FLASH : Greece Youth unemployment rate : 60%. Welcome to the brave new world !!!

by raegun | 15th Feb 13, 9:06am 1360872393

Which leads me to fear that we are maybe closer to that age old solution to these things - war. And Einstein said that he didn't know what the third world war would be fought with but the fourth world war will be fought with sticks and stones. Perhaps we need to get our heads around this prospect and start thinking collectively how not to sentence our descendents to this

It is quite possibly that serious

by kin | 15th Feb 13, 9:17am 1360873033

There is really no need for War as an impetus for growth (or regrowth ?) Just pray for a powerful earthquake every few years and Presto !! an new engine of growth is here !!!

The Canterbury Earthquake rebuilt has been touted as our new growth engine for the next few years...All the Politicians and Economist agree.

Wonder what huge growth potential there would be if Auckland has a devastation like that !!!

As for the rest of the world, Climate Chang would be the new growth engine (as proposed by Obama). New Orleans has still not revived since Katrina, Sandy has caused an new growth development model of a few hundred millions if not more....

China's smog problems should initiate a few billions of research and development....

The world should pray for more disasters !!! Imagine if Greece has a killer earthquake now that killed thousands, surely ECB and Gremany would forgive their debts, not to mention form a few billion euro disaster fund to "revive" Greece. (After killing it with their Austerity pact)

by raegun | 15th Feb 13, 9:27am 1360873638

Tad easier to dial up a war than a devastating earthquake and as you can see it's only places that have a high takeup of insurance that get rebuilt, I don't think Haiti is getting anywhere too fast. Then that begs the question, how much longer can insurance companies keep stumping up for natural disasters, and that includes these once in a hundred years storms, tornadoes etc along with earthquakes

by kin | 15th Feb 13, 9:46am 1360874771

Yes and the "hundred years" storm and tornadoes seem to happen every year too !!!

Insurance is a scam....IF the goverment has not bailed out AMI, the whole scam would have been exposed. Now we are paying almost double for our insurance to continue the same scam.....If another earthquake happens we will be paying quadruple premiums to perpectuate the same scam.

Hiati is not a "developed" economy nor a member of any "EU" "NATO" G10" etc etc.

That's why they are where they are and will remain where they are....

by steven | 15th Feb 13, 10:08am 1360876116

The problem for insurance companies is the data is changing. Houses have been insured for 600? years, hence the risks are well understood, hence the premium should be competitive/fair.

Whats causing the re-insuarnce headaches is the 100 year events happening as 1 in 20 or worse. So sure, ignore global warming, but you will be paying for it, either with loss (if you odnt insure) , higher premiums, taxes or loss of capital/asset value.

Interesting how the one part of the private sector is voting with its feet and quite likely to exit leaving other private sectors no where to go.

just wait for the whinning....

regards

by speckles | 15th Feb 13, 10:06am 1360875962

war yes but economic takeover is a lot less messy?

by steven | 15th Feb 13, 10:14am 1360876452

Except an economy is all about resources. Sure Americans, Chinese, Saudis etc can buy NZ farms or Argetinian oil companies, until that is the Sovereign takes it back. That leaves only one way to secure/keep resources, might.

regards

by speckles | 15th Feb 13, 10:32am 1360877550

I know, point taken thou, I was thinking smaller countries like NZ can fundamentally be taken over economically(resources) which influence in essence the Sovereign... especially via FTA and alliance agreements the larger countries seem to determine a lot here already, the agendas already in play are unlikely to be hijacked by the public...

by steven | 15th Feb 13, 8:59am 1360871974

Good for you interest....thats one valuable piece of data...

regards

by JimboJones | 15th Feb 13, 10:33am 1360877618

The thing is that even in the very good times you still have companies that close down and job losses. Is 700 in two months bad? It's a pretty small % of the working population.

by Matt in Auck | 15th Feb 13, 10:49am 1360878543

well its 700 in a month really, as first half of January doesn't really count.

But its more the lack of job creation that is the issue than the loss of current jobs.

Sure jobs are always being created, but they are more scattered and "one off" as compared to the big job losses, which happen in big lumps

And I hear uni students are staying on longer and doing post grad, but that "Delay" to entry to the workforce can only go so far. What happens in a year or two if the economy is stil sluggish, and all those students have done their masters?

by Waripori | 15th Feb 13, 11:00am 1360879227

Any data is handy but I am not sure what a tally of job losses really tells us. I guess most job losses are actually one or two at a time and take place through attrition ( people leave and aren't replaced ). Most job creation is also one or two at a time with people starting and expanding enterprises. None of that will be reported and thus wont make the list.

High profile closures and big investments are more noticeable but probably not the real story. A bit like a new supermarket opening and creating 150 jobs. Is there really job growth in retail or are those jobs just replacing others in smaller or competing existing enterprises?

The Petone closure is interesting. That is NZPost ( which is struggling because of technology change destroying its core business ) trying to defend part of its business by investing in new and more efficient plant. That has always happened and the pace of it will actually need to pick up if we are going to have any manufacturing left here at all. We cant protect jobs in inefficient industries by forcing up our internal cost structures relative to the rest of the world.

by gypsymanz | 25th Feb 13, 2:32pm 1361755925

There are fears that hundreds of jobs are on the line as union bosses go into urgent meetings with several big businesses battling to survive.

First Union boss Robert Reid says the jobs situation will continue to worsen and he has been in talks with at least two large companies on the brink of receivership.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/employment/news/article.cfm?c_id=11&objectid=10867528

100s of jobs at risk at Telecom

300 at risk at print company Geon Group, 200 at Transpacific Industries

450 axed at Solid Energy - 1200 more under review

100+ under threat at Contact Energy

192 to go at Summit Wool Spinners

200 at Mainzeal.

A few more to add to the total.